soundoff(9 Responses)

Ron

Get over it people, this is just the latest in a series of distractions designed by the GOP to get your mind off of their shortcomings! Bush was directly responsible for far more deaths and I don't recall any of you crying about them!

November 28, 2012 at 5:24 am |

Debra Dalton

We need to get him out...he refuses to respond to anyone in his distract that disagrees with his point of view. I live here I deserve his attention too.

November 17, 2012 at 10:46 am |

Ed

Regarding the Benghazi attacks and who, if anyone was lying, put yourself in the president's shoes. If I was president and I didn't get the straight story from my advisers right away, I would be hopping mad and heads would be rolling. How happy would you be with your staff if they decided to withhold crucial information from you until after the election? The idea that somehow the president didn't have the full story including alternative opinions from different sources until after the election just doesn't hold water.

The situation with Ambassador Rice is even odder. If I was her I would be resigning in disgust from an administration that clearly gave her bogus information and set her up to give a load of manure to the press. By the time she gave her interview, five days after the event, they clearly knew what was going on. By that time either she was just completely out of the loop, or they left her with bogus info deliberately. Either way, her credibility is seriously degraded.

November 16, 2012 at 11:01 pm |

Chris

Wow, you somehow managed to essentially miss every single point. The General says it was unclear immediately that the exact group was Al-Qaeda. And Rice has been proven to exactly reflect that. Why is it a given that our intelligence agencies would immediately know the exact facts of everyone and everything that happened immediately. Two, where is it written that the government must disclose every single piece of classified information immediately? Ever consider they did not want to disclose everything they knew so that they could catch the attackers?

November 20, 2012 at 4:28 pm |

Mary Collins

Anderson, love your show! Been a fan of yours since Channel 1 days. Really appreciate your efforts to try and get the truth out of Dana Rohrabacher. I don't think the "truth" is in him. So very tired of the lies and constant attempts to make our President look bad. The election is over. We (Obama) won, they lost. The right need to get over it and move on. The "right" need to find a way to compromise or they will be gone in 2014. The people have spoken.

November 16, 2012 at 10:55 pm |

Matt

No Marry, YOU have spoken. This is exactly the type of logic that continues to inspire double standards in the media. Instead of getting to the bottom of what actually happened, you and others blame republicans for asking questions. Its quite astonishing, really. I don't think you'll find "truth" in any potential bit of information that may make Obama look less favorably.

November 28, 2012 at 1:19 pm |

Scott Weaver

I wish Anderson had pointed out that the NY Times continues to confirm that the Benghazi incident was mix of reaction to the anti-Muslin video AND a loosely planned terrorist attack. So the video DID play an important role is what transpired. The Republican line continues to be that there was no protest to a video. Anyone with a memory knows that protests went one for weeks all over the Middle East in reaction to the video. Benghazi was part of this flood of violence. Sad thing is these facts seem to be lost in all the the Republican drumbeat that it was a terrorist attack alone, and the administration does not like to acknowledge "terrorism" (a ridiculous claim) so therefore just made up the video story. Only good reporting is going to correct this misinformation campaign.

November 16, 2012 at 10:53 pm |

howie19

Just ask the question, if they were watching this attack by way of a drone for hours why didn't they send help??

November 16, 2012 at 10:46 pm |

Chris

One, there were two separate attacks. The consolote, and then the annex. So it was not one prolonged battle. Two, within 24 minutes there were local CIA people sent. Three, the availabliity of relief originally reported by Fox were not accurate. The emergency response team supposedly in Greece were in fact coming back from an exercise in Guam. The Special forces had to be assembled from spots around Europe and did not arrive in Italy until it had ended. Finally, the two generals in charge or the region both said they not only didn't have any way to immediately intervene, but even had they, they would not have put more troops in harms way without greater knowledge of the situation. Also, since when can we just para drop troops into other countries any time we wish?